WASHINGTON -- Bill Gates once wrote in an e-mail that the threat of Java, a programming language developed by Sun Microsystems Inc., to his Microsoft Corp., "scares the hell out of me."
And with that, the company set out to dilute the impact of the versatile Java, claims the latest government witness to testify against the software giant.Microsoft made illegal changes in Java because it threatened the company's Windows-only vision, said James Gosling, vice president of Sun.
Java is a key element in the Justice Department's antitrust case against Microsoft. Sun originally created Java as a "cross-platform" language that offered software developers the capability to write a program once and have it run on any number of computer operating systems -- not just the dominant Windows but on others, including Apple Macintosh and Unix systems.
Microsoft responded to the threat by creating a version of Java that was written for Windows and incompatible with other systems, Gosling wrote in testimony submitted to the court and released Tuesday. Gosling was expected to undergo cross-examination Wednesday.
Gosling said Microsoft has tried to "flood the market with its Microsoft-dependent" programs, prompting more software developers to write several versions of Java.
"This is precisely what the Java technology was designed to avoid, and it demonstrates that Microsoft's actions threaten to fragment the Java technology," which would damage the cross-platform benefit, Gosling said.
In a statement released in response to Gosling's testimony, Microsoft denied it developed a Windows-based version of Java as a competitive reaction. It also said Java has failed to live up to its potential.
Microsoft pointed out that several companies, including Netscape Communications and Oracle Corp., tried to distribute Sun's version of Java but failed. Microsoft said it had nothing to do with the failures -- "they were entirely built upon Sun's technology."
The government contends that Microsoft used its influence in the software industry to crush its competition. It alleges the company illegally "tied" its Windows and browser programs, which allow people to view the Internet, together in one package to eliminate the market for browsers made by other companies.
Gosling backed up the government's claim.
"There is no convincing technical justification for making a Web browser an inextricable part of an operating system," he said. Such bundling could slow a computer's performance and "there are no significant efficiencies to be gained."
Gosling follows economist Frederick Warren-Boulton to the witness stand. Warren-Boulton, who finished his testimony Tuesday, was asked by Microsoft attorneys whether Netscape's $4.2 billion acquisition last week by America Online will affect Netscape's competitiveness.
"Obviously, an event of that magnitude is going to change something," he acknowledged.
In an e-mail Tuesday, Gates called the Netscape purchase "certainly paradoxical."
"The DOJ must be VERY dismayed at this merger," Gates wrote in the 800-word message, which was provided to reporters.
Gates also defended Microsoft's decision to distribute its Internet browser for free. Browsers generate "so much advertising revenue that you maximize revenue by giving them away free to drive usage," he wrote.
The government contends that the AOL-Netscape deal won't affect its case against Microsoft. Indeed, government lawyers have argued that the buyout of Netscape -- once a leading technology company -- demonstrates the effectiveness of Microsoft's aggressive campaign against it.